Skip to main content

Carroll v. State

Citations

  • 101 S.W.3d 454
  • 2003 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 68
  • 2003 WL 1726579

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that court of appeals may reanalyze point or issue on remand on grounds not required or foreclosed by remand order
  • holding that on remand a court of appeals may reconsider an issue and decide it on grounds not expressly contemplated by the court of criminal appeals’s order
  • holding that on remand a court of appeals may reconsider an issue and decide it on grounds not expressly contemplated by the court of criminal appeals = s order
  • approving court of appeals’ conclusion that trial court did not err even though court of criminal appeals had remanded only for reconsideration of harm
  • doctrine was discussed as if it was invoked by any appellate determination
  • “Once jurisdiction of an appellate court is invoked, exercise of its reviewing function is limited only by its own discretion or a valid restrictive statute.” (quoting Carter v. State, 656 S.W.2d 468, 469 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cochran, Keller, Meyers, Price, Womack, Johnson, Hervey, Holcomb, Keasler

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

36 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

31 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.